|
|
Post by belfieldhappyhour on Dec 27, 2012 23:43:56 GMT -5
Mike DeCourcy from the Sporting News tweeted tonight that Pitt center/forward Malcolm Gilbert is transferring. He is already off their roster, but the media guide had him listed as 6-11, 235. He went to Academy of the New Church and is from Smyrna, DE. (PAGING our Delaware folks)
Quote from their guide - "Gilbert is described as a terrific defensive player and tremendous shot blocker who has the rare ability to change a game without scoring. He is a solid low post defender with natural athletic ability."
Him, Zack and Jerrell would all be juniors, and I'm guessing he and Zack couldn't play at same time. Seems like we could use someone like this, but not sure he'd fit being a junior when eligible next winter.
Thoughts .....
|
|
|
|
Post by lasallescreamer on Dec 28, 2012 1:43:53 GMT -5
Of course he would fit. Need more bigs. He would fit right now.Is it even a question?
|
|
|
|
Post by La Salle 08 on Dec 28, 2012 7:55:28 GMT -5
Someone said he is goign to Fairfield to play with his brother. Rothstein maybe? I forget.
|
|
rcoz
Utility Bench Player
Posts: 144
Likes: 2
|
Post by rcoz on Dec 28, 2012 7:57:12 GMT -5
well maybe we dont have a shot but we really need another big guy. so maybe he will pick us.
|
|
|
|
Post by explorer88 on Dec 28, 2012 8:44:20 GMT -5
G was in love with the guy xoming out of high school. Like a lot of kids made a terrible mistake going that high. I am sure G put in a phone call.
|
|
|
|
Post by explorer88 on Dec 28, 2012 9:34:55 GMT -5
Looks like Malcolm will look to end up at Fairfield as was mentioned earlier:
Andrew Chiappazzi @achiappazzi 2m
Pitt release says transferring Pitt forward Malcolm Gilbert wants to play with his brother. Marcus Gilbert is a freshman at Fairfield.
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,689
Likes: 6,535
|
Post by MisterD on Dec 28, 2012 9:54:44 GMT -5
Or Marcus could transfer.
|
|
|
|
Post by jellybean on Dec 28, 2012 10:02:34 GMT -5
well maybe we dont have a shot but we really need another big guy. so maybe he will pick us. Name and stats are gone for this year on Pitt website...it's like he was never there. The stats from his FR year indicate he played 95 minutes in 19 games. Scored .5 and had .8 rebounds. Not someone who could help us. (I just found out he was redshirting this season.) Saw him in HS and never saw the hype. Looks like I was right. Also what is the "talk on the street" in Philly now that two of our HS players leave their program this season? |
|
|
|
Post by explorer88 on Dec 28, 2012 10:33:09 GMT -5
Jamel Artis next in line on the Pitt transfer plane?  ? |
|
|
|
Post by jellybean on Dec 28, 2012 10:56:47 GMT -5
Has to get to Pitt first.
Would be a nice player for us.
|
|
|
|
Post by explorerman on Dec 28, 2012 11:04:05 GMT -5
Yeah seriously... Pitt has had a fair amount of transfers out of the program over the last several years..
Artis should have learned his lesson but do not be surprised if he or Brimah, in 2 years, are sitting on La Salle's bench in street clothes.
G needs another above-average A-10 recruit besides Stukes, who looks like he is progressing right on schedule. A taller version of Duren has been stated before and is fair assessment.
The larger question: Who is the #2 a couple years playing next to Stukes? He is going to need to be a PTPer with range.
|
|
|
|
Post by explorerman on Dec 28, 2012 11:05:37 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by explorer88 on Dec 28, 2012 11:13:34 GMT -5
Odd thing he has been saying Pitt since August and still nothing concrete. I was told he will go to Pitt and I keep waiting and waiting for the commitment and it has not happened. |
|
|
|
Post by explorerman on Dec 28, 2012 11:25:32 GMT -5
Odd thing he has been saying Pitt since August and still nothing concrete. I was told he will go to Pitt and I keep waiting and waiting for the commitment and it has not happened. 88, if anyone would know... you would, are we still talking Artis? As you stated, your sources said Artis was going to Pitt in August, does that mean we have backed off accepting that as fact? |
|
|
|
Post by explorer88 on Dec 28, 2012 11:50:00 GMT -5
explorerman G always gets kids on the rebound so you have to believe G will always be available to a kid like Artis who he really loves as a player should he want to transfer. He told Garland after he committed elsewhere if you want to come back home you have a place to come back to. Many coaches burn that bridge after being denied but G takes the other approach and it has paid off for him.
I just find it odd that Artis hasn't committed after all of the hype of him going to Pitt. That tells me Pitt may be holding him at bay waiting for other kids. How long does it take the player and/or his advisor to realize this? I also heard grades were preventing Pitt from taking the commitment but I don't think anyone believes he will not qualify in the end unless something recently changed. I know in the summer he was not considered a ineligible risk.
Perhaps above all the problem is the kid is at Notre Dame Prep which had 5 out of 8 of their players denied eligibility last year by the NCAA and that is what the new hold-up is.
|
|
|
|
Post by jellybean on Dec 28, 2012 11:58:24 GMT -5
La Salle was at a Notre Dame game recently.......according to my sources. This is a case tug-of-war ....remember Marcus Morris.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 28, 2012 16:11:05 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure that Artis' academic status has something to do with why he hasn't committed to Pitt yet.
|
|
|
|
Post by lasallescreamer on Dec 28, 2012 17:04:11 GMT -5
I am not sure if our recruiting position benefits us(u can ALWAYS COME HOME) LSU is not a scrap heap. Why wouldn't a kid go to Pitt or UCONN when he knows he can always come home if he does not get love or PT? Once in a while and for good cause-fine; but it shoulod not be a policy. Might help in short term but destroys credibility. Rather recruit JUCOs as 2 year playersa who want to be here.
|
|
|
|
Post by explorer88 on Dec 28, 2012 17:09:32 GMT -5
I am not sure if our recruiting position benefits us(u can ALWAYS COME HOME) LSU is not a scrap heap. Why wouldn't a kid go to Pitt or UCONN when he knows he can always come home if he does not get love or PT? Once in a while and for good cause-fine; but it shoulod not be a policy. Might help in short term but destroys credibility. Rather recruit JUCOs as 2 year playersa who want to be here. We don't go into recruiting a kid with that philosophy. G leaves no stone unturned when recruiting a players (including recruiting the Grandmother). But when a kid tells you he is going to Virginia Tech or Pitt and you have lost the initial battle what is wrong with selling him on coming back home if it doesn't work out? I would think 90% of kids that transfer go back to what is comfortable to them when the initial decision doesn't work out. Back home or a former school that recruited them hard but they took another offer. Seems to me this just smart business. One in which G has benefited from on multiple locations. |
|
|
|
Post by lasallescreamer on Dec 28, 2012 19:16:43 GMT -5
May benefit in short term if player comes back; long term it can hurt if kids know they can "try out" another program because sorry old LaSalle always has open arms. Too, it causes program to "save scholarships"-- would love to have an extra big this year- even if only mediocre- bec. that player could mean diff bet NCAA or not. We must win now and/or in immediate future. Building for 3-4 years from now is great if we were doing great now. If G cannot take us to next level, will he get frustrated and leave? Will admin longingly look at MAAC? In other words will we ever now get to point where building for future is feasible?
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,689
Likes: 6,535
|
Post by MisterD on Dec 28, 2012 23:13:15 GMT -5
Lets say you're right, does that matter? Galloway not working out? Garland?
|
|
|
|
Post by lasallescreamer on Dec 29, 2012 2:23:07 GMT -5
I think it matters in the long run. Sure, we can take a kid 2 years from now- simply should not be holding self out on a "right of return" basis. And it does bother me that we always seem to be a player short-this year with no backup bigs whewre a schol might have landed us an average player who coulod contribute this year instead of a good player 2 years from now. The lack of winning and goin to SHOW changes ones focus.
|
|
|
|
Post by goexplorers on Dec 29, 2012 5:54:19 GMT -5
17 year old kids are allowed to be wrong. They want bright lights, they want ESPN, they dream big. They don't want it from the pine. So reality sets in and they want to come home. It happens all the time. Why not make sure they know that they have a place to come home to?
In the long run, kids want to go play for a winner. Earl helped make us a winner. Ramon is making us a winner. Tyrone, so far, is making us a winner. We're turning into a winning program.
From there, perhaps more 4 year kids will commit. If not, what's the harm in bringing Philly kids home who were wrong about wanting to go away for college.
|
|
|
|
Post by lasallescreamer on Dec 29, 2012 7:20:40 GMT -5
If they know there is always a LSU to come home to, they also know, A FORTIORI, that there is not a compelling need to pick LSU to begin with.I am not talking about excluding s/a from coming back but simply saying it should not be the cornerstone of our recruiting policy. Too, saving schol. should not be the highest priority when program cannot put a complete and balanced team on the floor right now.Too, a s/a is really hatdpressed to make a wrong decision-many fine D-1 schools are offering free 4 year ride where a young guy can get an ed. and get right start in life. Are we crying for young men who are lamenting a "bad decision" bec. they r playing 5/game and not 25? Its called life; hard knocks and perservering. There is much to be learned from working your way up and dealing with problems. In short, takinjg a transfer is fine; it simply should not be the branding of a school.
|
|
MisterD
The Baptist Himself
Voted Most Popular Poster 2012, 2013, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2022, 2023
Posts: 8,689
Likes: 6,535
|
Post by MisterD on Dec 29, 2012 9:11:09 GMT -5
But we're only allowing fallbacks for kids that would be signing under their skill level in the first place. Galloway, Garland, Pettis, etc are BCS level players. A hard line "it's now or never" just means you get never rather than their upperclassman years. 2 > 0.
|
|
|
|
Post by lwc4591 on Dec 29, 2012 10:47:03 GMT -5
I believe what Dr G does is 100% correct and to do otherwise would be childish and unprofessional. I understand what some of you are saying but let's be honest Dr G is only taking the players he wants and I would bet some players have tried to come back but were turned down. I doubt very much that players thought well if this doesn't work out I will just go back to La Salle but more likely that they respected how Coach G handled their initial decision and felt good about approaching him regarding their return to Philly.
|
|
|
|
Post by jellybean on Dec 29, 2012 12:04:59 GMT -5
Another player I thought would have a hard time getting playing time in the ACC(Clemson) was Devon Coleman from Phila. Friends Central. Didn't play that much as a FR and tore his Achilles Tendon (how many guys have we heard having that injury recently).
Maybe we should have a thread just for ex-recruits?
Thoughts on Amile Jefferson at Duke? They just grabbed the #1 or #2 recruit this season. Plays the same position. Have to think if he leaves that Temple would be the place for him to land.
|
|
|
|
Post by lasallescreamer on Dec 29, 2012 21:03:33 GMT -5
We have diff views on the process. Kids should be picking schools for multiple reasons inc. academics, coaching, location, the programs stability and p/t. We r a good enough school in a good enough conf with good enough coaching to be in it with many players inc. the kids who came back. I think we disagree more on the philosophy than the results. I am not upset that the kids came back. I simply would not be telling recruits that there is always a spot for u,i.e., if u r unhappy, give us a call, but remember that there is rarely a schol. available bec. we r going to be fully recruiting a complete team!! Thus, if a spot is open, we can talk, if not best of luck. A kid can always return and walk on-see Ralph Lewis, and earn a schol. while matriculating on a "needs" grant. In short, if a s/a can transfer, tghats great; if no schol available and no want to earn one, thats ok too as that schol went to another kid who is on roster and hopefully helping.
|
|
|
|
Post by mookie on Dec 29, 2012 21:44:07 GMT -5
We have diff views on the process. Kids should be picking schools for multiple reasons inc. academics, coaching, location, the programs stability and p/t. We r a good enough school in a good enough conf with good enough coaching to be in it with many players inc. the kids who came back. I think we disagree more on the philosophy than the results. I am not upset that the kids came back. I simply would not be telling recruits that there is always a spot for u,i.e., if u r unhappy, give us a call, but remember that there is rarely a schol. available bec. we r going to be fully recruiting a complete team!! Thus, if a spot is open, we can talk, if not best of luck. A kid can always return and walk on-see Ralph Lewis, and earn a schol. while matriculating on a "needs" grant. In short, if a s/a can transfer, tghats great; if no schol available and no want to earn one, thats ok too as that schol went to another kid who is on roster and hopefully helping. I think you completely missed 88's point. The coach does not go in recruiting a kid and says "you can always come home". The coach goes after the kid and once the kid makes the decision to attend, THAT'S when he's told "you can always come home". At that point, the coach has nothing to lose but a possible transfer down the line. It's classy...yes, it would've been nice to get the kid right out of high school but the kid chose to go elsewhere and the coach is making sure that he's in the running for the kid should he decide to transfer. So...the kid is told he can come back AFTER he made his decision, not in the beginning of the recruitment, not in the middle...but AFTER he's chosen to commit somewhere else. |
|
|
|
Post by explorer88 on Dec 29, 2012 22:07:38 GMT -5
Exactly mookie. No sense in burning bridges after a kid makes a decision.
|
|
?
